Looks like I'll need to dig up more links to prove to you Starkers that MS does the same thing. Google is not as evil as you think. They all are.

Do you block Google on this site?

What you really mean is....

Google isn't alone in being evil...they are all as bad.

Clear, logical thought isn't your forte, not really...;)

What was this thread about again? 

I don't know either, I didn't even know this article was still going. I don't usually make articles that keep going like this. Maybe I need to study what I did here to see if I can apply it on other articles.

Go to http://network-tools.com/default.asp?prog=trace&host=www.immi.gov.au  It will show yoru route across the internet.  At every stop a server marks who you are, where you want to go, and where you came from.  There should be no expectation of privacy when doing anything on the internet.  (exceptions exist though . . but only to a degree).

Google's OS will collect a ton of data for them to use.  They will use it to provide services that make you want to use it more.  They will try to make money off the data they collect.  If you do not want them to collect data and use it  . . don't use their OS.

May the best greedy corporate entity win.   BTW, why so much anti-linux sentiment here, is it because the Impulse client needs IE7 to run?

You either claiming some tricky Proxyfication can hide (somehow) a trace reasonably well or refering to any server(s) wrapped into a self-looping "private" net, right?

Connect once at the proper node, you'd still become anonymous or flip "feeds" fast enough to remain undetectable through portable snatching -- welcome to wifi illusions, where these nodes fail to take responsability on illicit activities unless ordered to.

The Dream Police isn't technically advanced (by coordination or otherwise), in fact. Cuz, ISPs (international, need i insist) cash in & has the following attitudes; who cares what happens.

Slacked and relaxed, we get what we deserve or pay for.

I used linux long before I even heard of Stardock - when I got a RedHat Pro box while working a tech investment conference in Scottsdale, where RedHat was public offering it's way to Wall St. legendary status.  Now, it's just an also-ran owned by another also-ran.  Since then, I've toyed with it with a hobbyist's interest and have tried a few dozen installs of various distros on a handful of computers I have on my home LAN.

But to answer your question, I feel that what you're observing is called "back-lash" driven by two issues:

1) It never matched the hype generated.  Ever. The world hasn't just moved on from the Linux bus - the world never got on board.  Sure, there are quite a few LAMP servers out there running commercial web sites and data warehouse portals, but who cares?  Mind-share here is coming largely from home users that think LAMP is what you turn off when it's time to go to bed.

2) The Linux community presents itself quite readily as a bunch of under-sexed geeks that are very willing to give a new user absolute grief for forgetting to phrase their help and support questions in the form of an answer.  RTFMan pages works for assembly language programmers.  It does not work for Bob & Sally from Peoria that just want to fire up a computer and run some apps, play some games, and MySpace themselves into identity theft.  There are exceptions, and some linux user communities actually go well out of their way to bring in and nurture new users, but they are just that: exceptions.  And they come too late.

Eloquent and succinct...;)

More like humorous and innacurate.  Zealotry exists in every camp whether it's foss/Linux or propietary MS, and if you weren't trying to sound funny, you would have mentioned that a big exception to that "rule" is Canonical's Ubuntu boards.  They have done a lot and their distribution has advanced in strides to hide the nasty underworkings on the system from Bob & Sally so their plug-and-play wifi adapter and usb flash which they bought on BB works out-of-the-box, in most cases.  Technically there's nothing really windows  can do that a linux distro can't. Well, maybe give way to almost every virus/botnet/worm/spyware available out there. I give you that.

Kona, you are missing my point.  I'm not saying that MS and/or others don't collect data... or that they aren't somehow evil in their own way.  What I am saying is that I see Google as being more evil... because they scour the net for all kinds of information and seek to profit from it ALL.   Not only that, Google is persistently in your face with annoying advertising that attempts to part you from your hard come by cash.... and that pisses me off severely, which is why I block Google at every opportunity. 

So in a nutshell, kona, there is absolutely nothing you can say or do to change my mind... Google is a scavenging parasite: period.

I block Google at every opportunity on every site.

I know all this, Zubs, really, I do.  However, you too are missing my point!  For example, my ISP knows that I visit this site and others, but it does not bombard me with interest related ads... Google would, if I let it.  My ISP sends me a monthly newsletter with a number of promotions and special deals, but I subscribe to that and can opt out at any time... Google does not provide an opt out, its advertising is pesristently there unless blocked.

Furthermore, while data is disseminated across the net, point of origin and destination data (cookies and etc) largely remains untouched on servers.  It is used mostly for speed, efficiency and re-routing purposes, though government and various  law enforcement agencies do have access to it when necessary, and undestandably so, given how much internet crime there is. 

However, Google uses this point of origin/destination data to target users with localised ads and other unsolicited/unwelcomed crap.  I sure as Hell don't want to see it, but there is no opt out unless I go to extremes and install NoScript and AdBlock Pro to block Google's slimy tentacles... and I should not have to go to this extreme of installing what is for me, otherwise unnecessary software.

Yes, these things piss me off, but what really irks me is Google's incessant trawling of the net and using personal information for the purpose of adsvertising.  For example, my ex-brother-in-law  (and he's nobody important), has a Google page revealing quite a bit about him.... stuff he'd rather not be public knowledge. Nevertheless it's there and my niece curiously did a Google search on him to discover her father has a criminal record and that she has a (similarly aged) half brother and sister she knew nothing about. 

It was later revealed that most of this information was gleaned from dating sites and other forums he visited.  However, also included with those search results were numerous ads for dating agencies, sex aids and escort sevices, etc.  That is what I object to... the use of one's personal information purely to profit from associated advertising.... and nobody can tell me that is right.

They're at the top of the vanishingly small list of exceptions that I had in mind.  I didn't think it necessary to name names, because - as you help demonstrate - everyone that has any experience with *nix knows they're the one's trying their hardest to promote linux in a positive way.  Any other examples?

Try getting Linux to support a mainstream tablet laptop.  By 'support' I don't mean 'boot'.  I mean support the hardware and the capabilities of the machine.  So, for example, Vista kicks Ubuntu's butt on things like:

* display panel feature buttons

* pen stylus precision

* voice and writing recognition

* battery/power management

And if your pen-computing laptop is using FinePoint digitizing hardware for the pen, you're hosed.  Perhaps that has changed by now... I hear OpenSuse 11 had something.  Great - it's only been about two years since some of the majors flipped from Wacom-based pens to FinePoint.

[EDIT TO ADD: And if there is a question about whether or not I'm an MS "zealot" I'll say this: I would guess that I've got a larger number of entirely different operating systems running on my home LAN that you do on your home and office networks combined.  I'm not vendor-oriented.  I like bits and pieces of many operating systems.  But when it comes to end-user suitability for Joe User, MS is producing some good stuff.]

@starkers

Just sounds like very good metaserchers to me.

Yes, it has, and if it hasn't changed enough, it's not because of Linux' shortcomings, but rather there hasnt been any GOOD driver SUPPORT from 3rd party companies, like the manufacturers of the peripherials you mention. ATI only recently published thousands of pages worth of documentation about their latests GPUs, and only recently are Linux users experiencing good open-source driver support for their HD 4000 cards on Linux.  The propietary flglx drivers are very poor quality, but that's because of ATI, not Linux.  A similar situation occurs with Nvidia.  Sometimes manufacturers have gone to be outright against Linux, for reasons no one knows. 

Are you saying, then, it's perfectly OK for Google to unearth the more intimate details of your personal life and make them publicly available on the internet?

Yes, my ex-brother-in-law put stuff up on dating sites and forums, but that information was intended for acquaintances on those particular sites... not the wider general public., yet there it was, mixed up with sex toy ads and the like.  Now I have no liking whatsoever for my former brother-in-law - couldn't have happened to a nicer person - but it's the principle of the thing, that anyone's pesronal info can be used by Google to derive profit from associated advertising.

And there is nothing on this Earth that'll convince me it's right.

You can do that with ANY search engine.

I really don't want to insult but if someone posts personal info on the net than that's what happens. Price you pay for submitting personal info online. As an example I'm pretty sure I can dig up personal details on you as well Starkers.

As for the ads it's funny. I see no Google ads anywhere I go except a small handful of sites. And only one small one line ad in my Gmail.

Does your paranoia have no end?

No. I agree with you starkers. That its not right for Google to use personal information to advertise. But its not against the law.

The problem is as soon as you post information on a public network it then becomes public viewing. Anyone can have access to this info, its just Google is clever enough and have the infrastructure in to use/abuse this for their own gain.

Your former brother-in-law went to sites who cared little about his private information and I am afraid is now paying the price. Maybe thats the problem, internet users don't know what they should put into the public domain.

I suppose the one thing you can expect is that the Google OS will have advertising on it and no doubt if your brother-in-law gets it. It will have ads about sex toys.

Which Law_S exactly?

Trans-National CRC checks on packet received *and* flying by?

It's not FOR the Laws either... catchy, isn't it.

Ok, analogy time.

Linux is the smart kid in the back of math class who plays with his calculator all day, just so you can't use it

Apple are the "cool" artist-like kids who think they're are better than everybody else

MS are the everyday high school kids, they have issues, but there are a lot of them

Google is the creepy kid who lets you cheat off him, but you can really see him becoming a stalker one day...

Google!=good

Google==parasite

MS advertises MS products, surprise surprise. Google advertises ANYTHING that will get it money, and it uses everything it can find on YOU to target those ads. Google earns over 5 billion dollars a year and its services are predominantly free, so it makes up the cost of mantaining all its sites, and then 5B on top, and all that money comes from you.

Starkers is right people

Google then took the information he was told . . and passed it along to other people that asked. 

Sometimes he offered other services . . like drugs. 

You didnd't have to take the drugs of course. 

But the truth is, that the more you talked to Google, the more specialized his drug offers were to you. 

He knew about yoru hard home life and your nut allergy and could hook you up.  Cheap.

Don't hate Google.  Just know the risks of talking to him.  Do the same with Linux and MS and Apple.

That I find hard to believe... unless you've swallowed a few lines of AdBlock Pro code and your eyesight has been affected.

Yup.... leesten to starkers... he's words of wisom are your salvation from the anti-Christ known as Google.  Repent and give up your wicked Google ways... repent I say.  It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a Google user to enter the kingdom of Microhoo and partake of the Bing, so repent and say: "Get thee behind me, Google"

About the only nut allergy I'm aware of is the one I think I'm developing for nuts who think Google is the bees knees.

If you make enough source changes or dig through archaic settings, sure. But how many people really want to spend hours setting up an OS before they start using it?

I'm still wondering why, by default even on the Ubuntu distro, KDE isn't doing simple things like open the K menu when you hit the Start/Windows key, and why you can't even map it to open the menu in the GUI key mapping utility.

Linux has its strengths - it's focused very strongly on developers and on power users. If you love tweaking, then Linux is great. But if you want something anybody can use, if you want to just sit down and start working - Linux just isn't there yet.

Linux is still very unpolished. It still feels likean unfinished work in progress. Sure, is can do everything, but with more work than with Windows or MacOS. It doesn't have a polished interface out of the box, even with distros like Ubuntu.

In any case:

This Google OS looks like it may be a minimalist browser based OS, possibly with a simple application launcher.  Okay, so that's gonna work for smaller devices and for a lot of people who just don't do much on their computers except the basics.

But - for people who do more than the basics, and for those who tend to buy the more expensive, more powerful machines, I don't think that will work. They'll want something more like Windows.

Of course, that is merely guesswork - there's really not much information about the new OS right now.

. . . and yes, Google advertises everywhere it can. It is, quite frankly, an advertising company. That's how they make their money.

. . . and frankly, I'm getting sick of people who take a one-size-fits-all approach to computing. Especially the "oh, everything is moving to the web" crowd. No, not everything is moving to the web. Yes, it's a great mew medium with a lot of promise. No, it won't work for everything. One size does not fit all, and there are many things that do not fit the web model. Sure, you can shoehorn anything onto a web page, but my experience is that isn't really ideal for things like games or documents or multimedia.

Here are some things that drive me crazy about web based applications:

• Offline storage and computing. Either it's completely unavailable, or it's stored in some temporary cache that may or may not be there when you unplug.
• Feature sets have never, in my experience, matched non-web apps. Pegasus Mail and Thunderbird and Outlook and other non-web email clients are still far more powerful than Gmail, Yahoo mail, and Hotmail. Microsoft Word and OpenOffice.org are still more powerful than Google Docs.
• Everything either grinds to a halt or starts throwing error messages when the network gets congested. How responsive the web app is depends completely on whether or not your neighbor is doing something that hogs bandwidth, like downloading video.
• 90% of the time, if I'm watching video, I frankly just download it. Streaming is a pain. It only takes a couple of dropped packets to kill the video, and it's annoying having frames stutter or switch to low-res every few seconds.
• This applies to anything realtime. It's far better to use local resources where you don't have to worry about the status of the network.
• I've seen web based games, and frankly they're no different from non-web games. This is an example of something just being shoehorned into a browser just because they can do it, and not because it's it's better in a browser.
• Frankly, the browser chrome isn't always needed or desireable. Do I really need all that in all of my applications?
• As a developer - web development is language soup. This may work well for large developers like Google, but for small developers and hobbyists, it's just too much to learn. I'd much rather work in one or two languages than in a dozen or so.

In conclusion: Just because you can do something in a certain way doesn't mean it's ideal, and IMHO even though the web has its place, I don't think it would be ideal to webify everything.

I don't believe that one size fits all. I don't believe that moving everything onto the "cloud" or the "web" or the "internet" is ideal for everything in our lives.

Oh yeah, and on this bit....

If it's not against the law, then it should be!!!   My former bother-in-law's posting things on a 'closed community' forum for certain community members was not exactly making them available for the greater public.  Just because that forum happened to be on the internet doesn't make... or shouldn't make a member's personal profile/correspondence within that community fair game for parasites like Google to exploit. 

If my former brother-in-law had written those things in a letter to those people it would have been against the law for Google to intercept that mail and/or rifle through the recipients belongings to read it... and so it should be for rifling correspondence intended for specific people on a not so public forum.  One has to become a member to read and/or post, so anything posted there was/is not intended for the general public.

My former brother-in-law was highly pissed that Google had used his personal information to create a 'profile' of him, and then used it to derive profit from associated advertising.  However, being a 'nobody' with little or no clout or influence, Google ignored his protestations and requests to have the page removed.  Last I heard it is still there/added to.

And no, I won't be posting a link... he's enough of a somebody to still sue me.

I keep telling you ANY search engine can do the same thing. Google isn't the ONLY one you know.

One bad experinence and they think the sky is falling down...

And I hate to say it . . . but kona is right.